How easy is it to port PS3 games to Vita?

The Vita is inarguably the most powerful handheld on the market. Much of the console's launch line-up has consisted of PlayStation 3 ports - but just how easy is it to adapt games for Sony's new platform?

To find out, spoke to developers from Capcom, Arc System Works, Ubisoft and Team Ninja...

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Nitrowolf22032d ago (Edited 2032d ago )

Seems like the actual porting is easy, but after that getting it with a high FPS,HD, Graphics, and utilizing some of the specs of Vita,such as Near,took more work then they probably had expected.

Autodidactdystopia2032d ago (Edited 2032d ago )

So... if the cell is so great and games on ps3 can only be achieved with the power of the cell, then why is it so easy to port games over to a handheld? I mean its a handheld...

The question is kind of rhetorical.

the vita's cpu isnt a powerhouse in relation to todays average desktop cpu so why is it that when you compare todays modern desktop cpu's to the cell, FB's pour from the cracks to come to its defense siting things like spes and floating point performance. when in reality many of the feats considered exclusive to the ps3 and cell are already at launch being recreated on a platform merely equipped with a quadcore arm proccessor?

SilentNegotiator2032d ago

You clearly don't understand the difference between PORTING the game and RUNNING the game. No one said that Killzone or God of War 3 was porting to the Vita tomorrow.

BlazBlue, Ninja Gaiden, Rayman Origins, Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3.....none of these games are going to win a medal for being technically impressive.

"the vita's cpu isnt a powerhouse in relation to todays average desktop cpu so why is it that when you compare todays modern desktop cpu's to the cell, FB's pour from the cracks to come to its defense siting things like spes and floating point performance"
Ah, I see. You're not looking for a real explanation. You're just here to say that "teh cell isn't dat powerfull mah pc is beter". Thanks, we didn't know that modern PCs could be more powerful. Thanks for the lesson. /s

Autodidactdystopia2032d ago

I wasn't nor would I state the obvious in saying anything about pc being better.

I was asking a philosophical question relating to doublespeak.

I know a LOT. claiming that I "CLEARLY" don't understand something simple is an oversight on your part.

anyway, have an agree for expressing your opinion :)

go you!

Yodagamer2032d ago

because the ps3 is a 6 year old tech, and it really isn't that hard to shrink down 6 year old tech (especially as of late when hardware in mobile devices improves every single day)

SuperStrokey11232032d ago

Seriously Yoda im suprised that you even had to say it but sometimes you need to point out the obvious to people.

ApplEaglElephant2032d ago

"I know a LOT"
Lol. no you dont. If you did know alot, you wouldnt be making such stupid statement.

MaxXAttaxX2032d ago (Edited 2032d ago )

'SilentNegotiator' is right.
The PORTING of multiplatform games vs RUNNING exclusive games designed for the PS3 are very different.

Not sure if you were trying to take a jab at the Cell or trying to be funny.
Or simply didn't realize that there's a difference in tech 6 or 7 years apart.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2032d ago
Mikhail2032d ago

So porting PS3 games directly would mean lowered FPS and other bugs. Sounds reasonable. I find this interesting since it can relate to the BC of PS4. This means that PS3 games can be ported to off the shelf hardware of today. I woder what Sony's approach for this and also Microsoft. Its either hardware and/or software emulation.

Dante1122032d ago (Edited 2032d ago )


How can this relate to BC on the PS4 when we don't even know the official hardware for it yet or if it'll even have BC for that matter? We really don't know anything yet but the rumors that are out there for the PS4 and "Durango".

"At the early stages of development, when we had just ported the PS3 version on the PS Vita, the FPS was more than 10 times slower than the current retail version. We managed to realise the current quality by optimizing (i.e. multithreading) all processes related to the CPU/GPU, and we reached a result which is very close - almost identical - to the PS3 version of BlazBlue."

Nice, Blazblue looks amazing on the PS Vita. Clear and smooth as heck. They did good.

sikbeta2032d ago


You took the Cell of out the pic, but it doesn't work like that, PS3 games will not be easily emulated thanks to how different is the Cell architecture, that's why rumors saying Sony is ditching cell for the PS4 pretty much assure no BC in the PS4

TENTONGUN2032d ago

just maybe ps3 games wont be compatible with the ps4. ps2 still sells cause of no bc. ps3 will be around bout a decade reguardless. makes me think that since most money sony makes is off software, would it be a good idead to make it bc. then again ps3 game sales will be mostly preowned when the ps4 is the big focus. seems like they can just shit on us when it comes to bc. sony might not waste their time and money with it

portugamer2032d ago

I don't understand why, TODAY, people still wants Bc so bad.
Our TVs have 3-4 hdmi ports, no problem to have one ps3 near a ps4.
Unless ps4 does some magic upscale to 4k, no aliasing, and let us play uncharted,gow3,etc, games at 60 or 120 Hz, I would prefer playing on a 0 noise ultra-slim ps3,that will cost 99$, in a couple of years, instead of playing on a (maybe) +400 watt noisy ps4.

Maybe ps4 will have a 35nm cell processor ,for Bc, along with the (maybe)AMD CPU. Maybe that cell would cost 10-20$ to include one on the ps4, for media decoding,video,3d, music, and for a full scene AA x64/128 treatment, no more edges. This cell could help the system in many ways. Will the ps4 need a CPU/gpu,at 100%, with all those cores and MHz, just to run a mp3?

A good 'old' and cheap cell would be fantastic, for those 'small' tasks.

Hozi2032d ago (Edited 2032d ago )

If I know SONY they will release two versions of PS4, with limited BC, and then scrap it after those models are sold out. Then they will begin to re release games for PS3 playable on PS4 and sell it as an HD-HD Remake.

gypsygib2032d ago

I just checked out a Vita demo station yesterday, I have to say that it's launch games have better graphics than both PS3s and 360s launch games imo.

TopDudeMan2032d ago

Why would you need it ported? What about the remote play feature? No sense in buying the same game twice.

ninjahunter2032d ago

Not everyone who will be buying a Vita owns a PS3. I for one am a PC gamer, but i will be getting the vita so that i can have access to some of the best franchises, such as ninja gaiden, bioshock or some of the playstation exclusives.

Muitnorts2032d ago

I personally bought Rayman Origins for Vita. It's just a game that I feel suits the platform better than a home console (and looks incredible)
It'll just depend on the game. But remote play isn't as all encompassing as some would like, and it's limited to when you have a constant wi-fi connection.

Nutsack2032d ago

Not that interested in straight PS3 ports...

Would mean the PSVita becomes a boring little brother that does the same as the PS3.

PSVita needs more platform defining own games other than what's on PS3. It needs the Loco Roco's, the Patapons, I still am flabbergasted why they didn't have those in the launch line up, especially for Japan that have no interest in Uncharted...

JayD-1K2032d ago

i agree but, i wouldn't mind a Heavenly Sword port or even, a Lair remake with Vita controls!

resistance1002032d ago

Lair works via remote play

Dante1122032d ago (Edited 2032d ago )

Don't worry. Newly made games are going to be announced for the PS Vita next Friday.

@ jose

Well keep waiting, bub.

PimpDaddy2032d ago

This is what I have been saying for awhile. The Vita is nice hardware. Nobody is questioning that. It's the games that will hold it back. They are catering to their "core". We all know their "core" will buy the Vita no matter what games their are. It's the other gamers that they want to sell the Vita to that will go out and buy the 3DS or play games on their mobile phones and tablets instead.

I'm not trying to hate on the Vita. I consider myself more than a casual gamer. But even for me the games aren't something that I don't already have on my PS3 or 360.

supremacy2032d ago (Edited 2032d ago )

I would agree with you to a certain degree, but even the 3DS has its share of ports.

I believe whats holding it back its the overall asking price for the experience. The unit itself, memory cards, ($50)games.

Some feel thats too much to ask for honestly, because the new and original ips will come and go and thats inevitable.

tiffac0082032d ago (Edited 2032d ago )

^I think developers are now using ports as their gateway in learning how to make games for a new hardware, without investing a lot of money doing so.

I would be surprise if this port trend continues, seeing as there is the Remote Play feature and the planned PS3/PSV Cross-content initiative.

And the prices will go down eventually, its the nature of the console business. So it won't be a barrier for long but Sony still needs to bring more free apps and PSV only games to justify the purchase, especially to the eyes of the general public.

Show all comments (52)
The story is too old to be commented.